Summary of Oakville Winter Open Feb 2-4, 2018

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: Summary of Oakville Winter Open Feb 2-4, 2018

Hi John:

I know you prefer a prize structure that gives lower prizes to more players.......thus your plumping for 3 pt. prizes......which of course lowers all the higher scoring prizes. I believe you feel that this would attract more average players, who would feel even they had a chance at a prize, even if quite small. I hope this is your thesis and I'm not putting words in your mouth!

On the other side of the coin though, since the prize money is finite, is there a legitimate question about how low the top prizes can be, before top players stop playing, because the prize is insufficient for the effort?

I know top players also "love" the game, but it is a financial source for them as well, like a business. They have to measure their expenses vs their odds of a prize, and how high that prize might be.

Both seem possible models, and each will attract players differently.

I think the organizers have to decide which model they want.....and they are free to do that......this is a capitalist venture, chess organizing.

But the fact that some organizers choose the Hua model, does not stop other organizers from gambling on the Brown model.

In fact, until the Brown model is tried for a major weekend tournament, all we have is theoretical argument. We need on the ground facts to do any comparison, and we don't have those for the Brown model.

Bob A

[John Brown]

Re: Summary of Oakville Winter Open Feb 2-4, 2018

Bob you are not correct.I want to see a tournament where there is only an open section with the top twenty players winning a prize.
I don't believe in class prizes. If you are going to have class prizes then those who participates should have their money left in their section and give more prizes ,this part of your statement would be true. Organizers need players to pay expenses. Make the tournament attractive to everyone and you will get more participants.
If you look at the Oakvillle structure the 1500 and 900 sections had the most players and they were charged the lower entry fees. Those two sections also got perfect scores paid out. If charging lower entries attract more players then I guess that is something to look at.

I think the biggest problem with the Winter Open was just that "Winter" You are not going to get the top end players coming out for a Canadian Winter event especially not GM's from other Countries. January and February are unpredictable weather months. Superbowl weekend could have been a factor as well for the lack of older players participating.

Because the Canadian pool is so much smaller than the American pool, I don't think the prize fund was attractive enough to draw high end players to get a score lower than 4.5. This score in a top section is very hard with a low number of players. So unless you won First or Second is it really worth coming out of the house?

Plus to travel to that site without a car is not easy. I came from Brampton on the final Day. I left home by bus at 7:30 am and arrived at Oakville at 9:30am there was a waiting period of 1/2 hour for train connection. I'm not sure if you could get home on public transit if you had a late game Saturday Evening in the 3 Round system . This could force you to take a bye or stay one night in the Hotel. If you took the bye your point score is effected. If you stay over your wallet is effected.

If you stayed 2 nights on the three day schedule in the hotel the rates were great in my opinion but if high end players are coming for the money the cost of a hotel would deter them as well.

The site was top notch but the skittles room had no where to analyze as it was full of parents. Restaurant locations were great.

Gary and Company did a great job on their first try. The event might get more support if they try a 6 Round on March Break weekend or a Easter weekend or Labour Day weekend for their next venture. Of course those weekend events are probably a bigger cash grab for Hotels as those weekends would be slow for them and they probably would charge more.

Bob you mention the "Brown" method.
The Canadian Opens of the past ran as the Brown method ONE Open section with prize winners and you have been to more Cdn Opens than me.

Gary was trying to bring a USA style tournament to Canada. He forgot that Canadians in a Canadian winter think differently.

If the elite in Canada want more money for prizes then Organizers need to use the St. Louis or Tata ideas for the elite sections. Making money in a weekend swiss in Canada is not the way.

[John Brown]

Re: Summary of Oakville Winter Open Feb 2-4, 2018

Hi Bob;
You mentioned the top end might stop playing if prizes are not substantial.
Chess is like a pyramid. You need to have a strong base to keep the top at the top.
If organizers cater to the top by feeding from the bottom then they need to make the bottom want to play . You don't attract insects with bleach you attract them with sugar!
The organizers have not catered to the bottom instead they have sent the bottom packing. If the top falls it is because the bottom is not interested in the top.
Years back Macedonia Labour Day had a guaranteed prize based on entries. They had a great turn out in the U1600 and the section made the numbers. However the elite section did not make it's numbers. What did organizers do? They took from the other groups and reduced the prizes so the elite could get better prizes.
That started a domino effect and the numbers for later Labour Day Opens dropped. Players said "Hey why play" Organizers don't stick to their ads. That killed guaranteed prize funds, which in my opinion was a fair way if we made the numbers we get the prizes. At one time Sections were gauged by entry fee. Play in the top section pay higher entry fee. It used to be Premier, Intermediate and Novice. That was killed by one entry for all and numbers dropped. Then players at the bottom end started just playing in selected tournaments, so Organizers had to bring in more Juniors and that caused more adults to drop out reducing numbers again. All these ideas did not bring out more elite players, but they did destroy the base at the bottom.
A stronger base is obtained by catering to the bottom. Make the bottom want to play and the numbers will go up and then you can take from the bottom. If we had a swiss tournament with no elite would numbers drop? I believe they would go up.

[Hugh Brodie]

Re: Summary of Oakville Winter Open Feb 2-4, 2018

I am in agreement with many of John's points. Why encourage mediocrity? Have an "Open" section - open to everyone - but have prizes from 1st to "Nth" place. Add other sections (at much lower entry fees) with trophies or books as prizes. Maybe even have a second "Open" section (no rating restriction) in which prizes are trophies or books - again at much lower entry fees that the "cash" section.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Summary of Oakville Winter Open Feb 2-4, 2018

I think the biggest problem with the Winter Open was just that "Winter"

If any chess tournament would get 180 players, Canadian chess would be at a different level long time ago. Gary and Co tried a new model (at least for the past 10 years) and they succeeded in number of players. Hope their excel sheet in black too, and willingness to organize more is only growing up.

[John Brown]

Re: Summary of Oakville Winter Open Feb 2-4, 2018

The question would be if all sections paid the same entry fee would they have got those numbers. The lower groups paid less so more came out.

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: Summary of Oakville Winter Open Feb 2-4, 2018

The question would be if all sections paid the same entry fee would they have got those numbers. The lower groups paid less so more came out.

Hi John:

Hal Bond in Guelph offered a lower entry fee to the lower sections the last time I played there. He gave them trophies as prizes. The lower section entry fees pay for all the tournament expenses, the trophies and the organizer's profit.

With the top section, I believe he put into its prizes, 100% of all entry fees.....they pay nothing towards the expenses of the tournament, nor the organizer's profit......pretty good deal I think.

As far as I know, this system attracts for Hal both sufficient players for his top section, plus a good turnout in the lower sections, which gives him enough to cover their trophies, tournament expenses and his profit.

Is this an accurate assessment of his system of giving something attractive to both the top group, and the lower sections (Lower entry fee)?

Bob A

[John Brown]

Re: Summary of Oakville Winter Open Feb 2-4, 2018

No idea. I have enough trophies from Guelph. I played in Jan to get a FIDE Rating unfortunately I had a bad cold and had to withdraw.Hal
's tournaments bring players who want trophies and rating points. Not cash prizes you can't compare apples to oranges Bob.

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Summary of Oakville Winter Open Feb 2-4, 2018

Gary and Company did a great job .....

John, you got that much correct!
You can second guess the prize distribution, entry fees, whatever all you want, but....

They had the courage to try something new.
They got 185 players and 58 of them won cash.
Huge success, congratulations guys! :)

[John Brown]

Re: Summary of Oakville Winter Open Feb 2-4, 2018

Hi Alex;
It seems everyone is concerned on most chess players being Amateurs,why not have an amateur entry fee when amateurs compete in cash prize events but cannot win a cash prize.? However if the top Amateur wins a section then they get a free entry into the cash prizes next time around. Sort of like Tata , the winner of Challenger group gets to move to Masters Group next year. I really do not think all amateurs want cash prizes but I do know that entry fees do deter amateurs from playing in more tournaments.

[Hugh Brodie]

Re: Summary of Oakville Winter Open Feb 2-4, 2018

Most - if not all - EOCA tournaments have an "amateur" option - you pay $30 (instead of $60), but you are not eligible for a prize.

[Gary Hua]

Re: Summary of Oakville Winter Open Feb 2-4, 2018

Thanks to all who have commented and made your views known.

We will take into consideration of all the views ( good and bad ) and make the next tournament an even bigger and better one.

No tournaments are perfect in this world unless they have very good sponsorship $$$.

If you expect lower entry fee, expect lower pay outs. If you expect good pay out, please expect to pay slightly more for the entry fees.

Please understand that EMC is trying to make the chess scene in Canada a better one. We have achieved many of our objectives and we are very happy on this point.

We have received very encouraging feedback/comments from players and parents and this is what makes want to make it a better one the next time.

There is so much to learn as we keep moving forward. We exist to elevate your chess experience - that's why we are called Elevate My Chess Canada. Remember also - we are not a charity organization but a profit organization who has to make viable financial decisions.

We also always encourage other organizers to hold bigger tournaments as well for the good of Chess in Canada.

Thanks so much again for your participations.

Stay tuned for our next big one - weekend tournament.....

Cheers for Chess in Canada

Gary Hua

EMC